Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:113917 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 79130 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2021 16:21:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2021 16:21:11 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 741921804E2 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 09:18:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-ej1-f42.google.com (mail-ej1-f42.google.com [209.85.218.42]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 09:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-f42.google.com with SMTP id ap14so3780046ejc.0 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2021 09:18:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=eC2zzcaNr4FKctX5pNgzXSXhwS8DU1jYa6PBDQhMoaw=; b=t5y73ugpzmmtNy84+rrcQa4uq3lqo00wi+fi3D+Mcy4n6NlvHppx1OZVKcNpfTOA7b kfvxI2TvbANeOP1BK0+1Ce4P9FS9e76V5Z1WDCqwpnPgYTrDKIZIx93qCOC8hYNcE3yQ 5Bq6m7WhEXCfXtHvr7+HHlHRIlah2TxZ0QzVtbSsP7DsRAX3AgLx+06WcQbwrEqM9mo0 nsK4FtyyjTalwMzhmSycGWyDH+Y2BVEE89SbCRlFoXJZ7KDzoLrXA19893nVcSSrPmBn hyPBEdd7alp85mUQ0LVgVPK0F4xylzoXu790NfE4xpvVroGNqHGkZD7X1Bt/Qcmar6gt sk6g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=eC2zzcaNr4FKctX5pNgzXSXhwS8DU1jYa6PBDQhMoaw=; b=dnS5z41jXxvX444t/PvIobHsuVHYOriShKk7qvM0hq3hK3HeyA3YUAFQyxENJdtYZN cfe4EOesxUdZ2CBiDqfSWDKh8t4S6QYONE/h3zf06l2INTQFvQcyePBh4C88/rpNukow jBA3TGDWR1vsV9qJghqeWE4e9N1a1ChgPcf9SFENLS8vSz3s2fctrHH9Cqmc2gjjt4/A RFPSyXjXGywWD9y43ddjlo0R7G0UDGT6UDSeoGGjZ554XzMw3RSHkeqCeKUIKCxIYfRj ae/jjOzjhynkPF2Frk4mYIRhL3gfuRiaScQ0y1eWaULAe6RAXv4I7TDzcUEuae0MwxU/ Gv5w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531HPfvAe1KQeZVkmhAwdk0KfyXHfaQBsGh36/bLFdvy8YPCf8Q9 UU8DJFaX15KQxf1bfZNZmCyxcAWVaRU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzPNX5cpglaKXgZDmDh2zPpMxGUlIu1mczaLXByAxcl0zQXMQQbtANj1ZICfRLtGX0n6/friQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:8546:: with SMTP id h6mr9813275ejy.23.1617293936163; Thu, 01 Apr 2021 09:18:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.22] (cpc104104-brig22-2-0-cust548.3-3.cable.virginm.net. [82.10.58.37]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id h22sm2982334eji.80.2021.04.01.09.18.55 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Apr 2021 09:18:55 -0700 (PDT) To: PHP internals References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 17:18:55 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Changes to Git commit workflow From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Tommins) On 01/04/2021 15:59, Sara Golemon wrote: > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 9:21 AM Bishop Bettini > wrote: > > I also added a FAQ. > > > I disagree with the position this document takes on immortal keys.  We > should encourage best-practices with the knowledge that some people > will weaken their security with an immortal key, not start from a weak > position and suggest that adhering to best practices is "paranoid". I've been looking around, and most of what I can find says that expiring a primary key which you use directly for signing has very little value, because anyone who has the private key and passphrase can change the expiry date at any time.  See for example: https://security.stackexchange.com/q/14718/51961 The main use case seems to be when using sub-keys, where the primary key (with no expiry) is kept offline, and new sub-keys are generated from it regularly (e.g. once a year) with an appropriate expiry date. This is based only on a few hours of searching online, however, so I'd be happy to see a better explanation of how to use expiry effectively. Regards, -- Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]